Tuesday, September 17, 2013

Film Review: Hannibal (2001)

After
a botched drug bust, FBI Agent Clarice Starling (Julianne Moore) is
reassigned to the Hannibal Lector (Anthony Hopkins) case, in which Mason
Verger (Gary Oldman), Lector's only surviving victim, has a special
interest. Lector reemerges and Starling races to capture him before
Verger.

Hannibal is a crime thriller taking place 10 years after
The Silence of the Lambs. The film focuses on both Starling and Verger
as they try to track and capture Hannibal Lector, who has been
"hibernating". There isn't much investigating, in fact, most of the film
is simply waiting; waiting until something happens, reacting, then
waiting -- the psychological depth is nonexistent. Instead, the story
implements more straight-forward thrills and chills through its tense
encounters and disturbing visuals. The ending is good, but it feels
rushed and implausible.

The most negatively effective change in
Hannibal is the change in Agent Starling -- both in character and
actress. The change from a subtly developed, deep, powerful and
independent character from Silence of the Lambs is changed to a very
generic, hollow, tough "don't take nothing from no one" character for
Hannibal is very disappointing. Her character is simply dislikable,
annoying, and irritatingly cliché; the whole "I'll fight you without
pads!", "I'm in charge;", "You'll know when I'm taking to you when I
look at you!" persona is just so forced and pretentious -- it works
better when it feels authentic and is developed properly. In fact, this
change feels so radical, it would've been better to introduce a new
character all together, at least if you're going to ignore consistency.
This is based on character, though, Julian Moore's performance is also
disappointing.

The story in Hannibal is hollow for a 2 hour
feature. Like I said, not much is going on throughout the 2 hours. For a
crime thriller, we never delve deep into the mind of the criminal;
however, there are quite a few thrills to be had, and plenty of
memorable deaths. I wish there was more investigation going on instead
of the reactive approach, though; Agent Starling spends most of her time
in a dark room contemplating about the past and waiting for information
instead of investigating or progressing. As far as memorable, tense
conversations, Hannibal is limited to very few. This is a film that'll
likely be remembered for its violence rather than its story.

Julianne
Moore's performance is mediocre, yet competent. I'm not a big fan of
Jodie Foster's performance, but Moore makes me wish Foster stayed. Moore
simply isn't consistent with her character, including her accent; and,
much of her performance is overacted in what seems like an attempt to
outperform Foster before her -- she fails to do so, though. Fortunately,
Anthony Hopkins and Gary Oldman support the film greatly with their
superb performances; Anthony Hopkins isn't as great as he was in Silence
of the Lambs, but he performs well, regardless; Gary Oldman is
particularly impressive with his performance, really taking on the
character with a chilling persona. Ridley Scott's direction is great, as
usual, but he needed a better, more fulfilling screenplay and a better
lead to really match the previous installment.

Overall, Hannibal
is an okay crime thriller. It features a hollow story, a weak lead, and
an inflated runtime, but redeems itself with tense and violence plot
points, two great supporting performances, great direction, and solid
music. In a way, Hannibal makes me appreciate The Silence of the Lambs
much more; and, Julianne Moore's performance makes me miss Jodie Foster.